Enter your email address

You have been subscribed.

Legal Update

At Drew & Napier, we provide legal updates and publications on the latest legal and regulatory developments that matter to our clients and friends.

You are encouraged to look through our online legal updates and publications by using the search function below.

Note: The legal updates and publications on this site are for general information only and should not be considered legal advice.

Showing 10 recent updates
  • Competition Law Quarterly Update Q3/2018

    23 October 2018
    Drew & Napier’s Competition & Regulatory Practice Group round up some of the major developments in competition law from around the world up to the third quarter of 2018.
  • Litigation privilege where criminal proceedings are reasonably contemplated

    14 September 2018
    The UK Court of Appeal has overturned the UK High Court’s decision in The Director of the Serious Fraud Office v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd [2017] EWHC 1017 (QB) that litigation privilege did not attach to certain documents produced in the course of a company’s internal investigations.
  • Court of Appeal confirms availability of Wrotham Park damages in breach of contract claims

    28 August 2018
    In a landmark decision, the Court of Appeal in Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd and others v Yeo Boong Hua and others and another appeal [2018] SGCA 44 held that Wrotham Park damages are compensatory in nature and should, as a matter of principle, be recognised as a part of the law of contractual remedies in Singapore. However, they are available only where there is a remedial lacuna, in the sense that orthodox compensatory damages and specific relief are unavailable, which can be rationally and sensibly filled by reference to Wrotham Park damages.
  • High Court finds limited obligations owed by bank to customer

    27 August 2018
    In the recent decision of AL Shams Global Ltd v BNP Paribas [2018] SGHC 143, the High Court held that a bank did not breach any duties in contract, tort or as a fiduciary in refusing to accept an incoming payment into the plaintiff’s customer account as the documentary evidence in support of the payment was insufficient to satisfy the bank’s internal policies. This decision clarifies the nature of the bank-customer relationship and reiterates the limited duties owed by banks to its customers.
  • High Court clarifies law on contractual discretion and penalty clauses

    14 August 2018
    In the recent decision of Ricardo Leiman v Noble Resources [2018] SGHC 166, the High Court held that an exercise of a contractual discretion may be invalidated if it was arbitrary, capricious or in bad faith. The High Court also held that where a clause is challenged for being a penalty clause, the Court will first determine whether the clause is a straightforward damages clause as different tests would apply.
  • Guarantees and Distributions

    6 August 2018
    This update explores the key points highlighted by the Law Society of England and Wales in their note, released in June 2018, clarifying the position with regards to whether a guarantee given by an English company in the context of a financing transaction may involve a distribution of assets to its members, as well as briefly considers the potential implications in the Singapore context.
  • Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency – Basic Legal Problems

    1 August 2018
    The usage of Bitcoin and other types of cryptocurrency is increasing in international commerce. Like any other emerging technology, there are numerous potential legal issues surrounding the use of cryptocurrency, most of which remain untested in the Courts. This update explains the mechanics of Bitcoin (the most widely used cryptocurrency at present) and highlights some of the potential legal issues.
  • High Court allows enforcement of arbitral award despite procedural irregularities

    20 July 2018
    In Sanum Investments Limited v ST Group Co, Ltd and others [2018] SGHC 141, the High Court allowed the claimant in a Singapore International Arbitration Centre arbitration to enforce an arbitral award against three of the four respondents in the arbitration despite two procedural irregularities associated with the making of the arbitral award.
  • Court of Appeal clarifies law on shareholder oppression actions

    12 July 2018
    In Ho Yew Kong v Sakae Holdings Ltd [2018] SGCA 33, the Court of Appeal laid down an analytical framework to guide the Courts in a situation where an oppression action features both personal wrongs and corporate wrongs. This framework also provides litigants with a set of questions which will help them decide whether to bring an oppression action under s 216 of the Companies Act or seek leave to commence a statutory derivative action under s 216A of the Companies Act.
  • The importance of reading and understanding contracts

    5 July 2018
    In the recent case of Broadley Construction Pte Ltd v Alacran Design Pte Ltd [2018] SGCA 25, the Court of Appeal held that the express terms of a contract can dispel the effects of a misrepresentation in some situations. The Court also reiterated that silence is rarely considered sufficient to amount to a representation.